In New Role, Hillary Clinton Treading on Familiar Policy Turf

WASHINGTON--While Hillary Rodham Clinton's policymaking role is
generally acknowledged to be a decidedly untraditional one for First
Ladies, it comes as no surprise to observers of her work on education
and child-welfare issues.

For starters, the health-care task force Mrs. Clinton heads bears
many similarities to the education-reform panel she chaired in
Arkansas, though its size and the scope of its mission are many
magnitudes larger.

And there is evidence that Mrs. Clinton has her hand in the
education policies of her husband's Administration, a mode of operation
she displayed openly during his governorship.

Rumors that Mrs. Clinton is routinely consulted on education issues
forwarded to the White House could not be substantiated. But Education
Department sources said Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley
discusses pending issues with Mrs. Clinton.

"It's not true that she signs off on things, but she has been
involved,'' said Marshall S. Smith, who is to be nominated as
undersecretary of education. "She's actually less involved now than she
was two months ago.''

Mrs. Clinton also apparently played a role in selecting top
Administration appointees. Two people who have worked with Mrs. Clinton
on education and children's issues said she asked them to suggest
nominees for the departments of Labor, Education, and Health and Human
Services.

It is generally assumed in Washington circles that her advocacy was
a key reason why Donna E. Shalala, with whom Mrs. Clinton served on the
board of the Children's Defense Fund, was named to head up H.H.S.

Finally, Mrs. Clinton's influence is evident in the Administration's
budget and its rhetoric on issues that have occupied her attention for
years.

"They worked so closely together, you couldn't tell whether an idea
was Bill's or Hillary's,'' said Sid Johnson, the president of the
Arkansas Education Association. "We'd be very surprised here if she
didn't play a big role in Washington.''

Asked during his campaign whether his wife would help set education
policy in a Clinton Administration, Mr. Clinton said: "I can't say now
exactly what she would do, but I sure won't stop listening to her. She
knows a lot more than I do about some of this stuff.''

Some detractors, however, and not only old hands uncomfortable with
a nontraditional First Lady, view Mrs. Clinton's powerful role less
sanguinely. Conservatives, in particular, view her as a big-government
liberal who may push her husband away from some of the centrist ideas
he espoused as a candidate, including his enthusiastic support for
welfare reform.

Some education representatives also express concern privately that
Mrs. Clinton will prove to be a powerful player who is unreachable
through traditional advocacy.

"Is she going to be running the show behind the scenes?'' one
lobbyist asked.

But the education community generally praises Mrs. Clinton's
background. Indeed, supporters often noted during the campaign that Mr.
Clinton's election would put two education advocates in the White
House.

"We have not one, but two people who have been personally,
substantively involved in the education-reform movement for many
years,'' said Michael Cohen, an education analyst who is now a
consultant to Mr. Riley.

The Arkansas Reforms

Mrs. Clinton admitted herself back in 1983 that she knew little
about education when Mr. Clinton appointed her to chair a committee
charged with recommending new standards for Arkansas schools.

"Just like he's done with health care now, he assigned her to what
he saw as the most pressing issue of the time,'' said Cora McHenry, the
executive director of the Arkansas Education Association and a member
of the Education Standards Committee.

"Hillary knew she wasn't an expert; her primary role was to keep us
on task,'' Ms. McHenry said. "The fact that she wasn't an educator was
probably an advantage. She could ask tough questions and get us away
from the traditional parameters of doing things.''

After months of hearings and deliberations, the committee issued a
set of recommendations to raise graduation and curriculum standards,
and essentially to force weak districts to merge.

The Clintons also added to their reform plan two more controversial
elements: a large sales-tax increase and a teacher-competency test, an
idea that earned them the ire of the A.E.A. for years to come. Mrs.
Clinton said that her committee heard frequent complaints about
incompetent teachers and that she and her husband knew such a test
would help sell the tax increase to skeptical legislators.

Both Clintons lobbied for the plan, but Arkansas observers say it
was Mrs. Clinton who became most identified with it. After presenting
the plan to the legislature, Rep. Lloyd R. George reportedly quipped,
"I think we've elected the wrong Clinton.''

Mrs. Clinton was also involved with other efforts to improve the
state's social services for children. She served on the state's Rural
Health Advisory Committee and on the board of Arkansas Children's
Hospital, and she helped found Arkansas Advocates for Children and
Families, a group that lobbied for increased funding of child-welfare
programs.

She was also the primary supporter of the Home Instruction Program
for Preschool Youngsters--commonly known as HIPPY--a highly regarded
family-education program for disadvantaged preschoolers that originated
in Israel.

A Committee Veteran

Mrs. Clinton went on to serve on several national education
committees and boards, including a panel that recommended expansion and
a new governance structure for the National Assessment of Educational
Progress in 1987.

She was a member of the W.T. Grant Foundation Commission on Youth
and America's Future, which in 1988 published "The Forgotten Half,'' a
report focusing on the need to improve occupational training for
non-college-bound youths.

"She saw the connection between the older adolescents and the work
she had done on issues like child care and the needs of working
women,'' said Samuel Halperin, the commission's executive director.
"She saw the whole thing in context.''

Mrs. Clinton was also a member of the board of directors for the
National Center on Education and the Economy, a Rochester, N.Y.-based
think tank.

Ira Magaziner, a corporate consultant who is now a top Clinton
adviser and is working with Mrs. Clinton on health-care reform, was
also a member. He chaired an N.C.E.E. commission that produced
"America's Choice: High Skills or Low Wages,'' a report that strongly
criticized American worker training and advocated, among other reforms,
youth-apprenticeship programs. Mrs. Clinton later headed the effort to
publicize the report.

"I wanted someone with the respect of the people who were going to
make the decisions, starting with the governors; someone who is
articulate, understands the issues, and has the political skill and
judgement to bring it off,'' said Marc S. Tucker, the president of the
N.C.E.E. "She helped to create a legislative agenda that the current
Administration is following up on aggressively.''

Indeed, the influence of both youth-training commissions is evident
in Clinton Administration proposals for youth service and the
school-to-work transition.

A Cozy Relationship

But the advocacy group Mrs. Clinton is most closely associated with
is the C.D.F., whose president, Marian Wright Edelman, she has
described as a mentor. Mrs. Clinton chaired the organization's board
for many years before she resigned during the campaign, turning the
gavel over to Ms. Shalala.

Mrs. Clinton appeared at a C.D.F. prayer meeting during the
Democratic National Convention last year, and both Clintons made their
first post-election appearance in Washington at a C.D.F.
fund-raiser.

More substantively, the Clinton Administration has proposed huge
funding increases for the programs the C.D.F. has lobbied hardest for,
such as Head Start.

"If you look at the Clinton budget, you can clearly see C.D.F.'s
whole agenda,'' said a House appropriations aide. "Marian Edelman's got
a lot to smile about these days.''

The cozy relationship between the C.D.F. and the Administration was
boldly illustrated by a recent news conference where Ms. Shalala
unveiled a plan to provide free immunizations for all children by
1997.

In introducing Ms. Edelman, Secretary Shalala said: "I wish Hillary
were here today, as we are fulfilling a promise to you.''

In an interview shortly before the November election, however, Ms.
Shalala said that Mrs. Clinton's personal agenda is not necessarily
identical to the C.D.F.'s.

"It's important to understand that Hillary does not come from
Washington, but from a state, and she probably sees the world somewhat
differently from people who work on these issues in Washington,'' Ms.
Shalala said. "Hillary probably has more confidence in the ability of
state and local governments to work with programs.''

"She'll be an advocate for the programs, but she'll also bring
visibility to what people are doing in their communities and will be
concerned with making the programs work together,'' Ms. Shalala
said.

A Big-Government Liberal?

But Mrs. Clinton's critics see her as an advocate of big government,
and particularly of government intervention in family life.

During the Presidential campaign, conservative Republicans portrayed
her as an anti-family radical, seizing on scholarly legal articles she
wrote in the 1970's that advocated children be given increased legal
rights in some cases.

That furor has largely died down, but fears that Mrs. Clinton will
be an influential advocate for bigger government have not.

Blant Hurt, an Arkansas businessman, recently published an opinion
piece in The Wall Street Journal comparing Mrs. Clinton's current
efforts with her tenure as Arkansas' "education czar.'' During that
earlier period, he said, she "looked at a public school system already
plagued by centralization and bureaucracy, and proposed to reform it
with more centralization and bureaucracy.''

"More government interference is not the way, in education or health
care,'' he said in an interview.

Mr. Hurt, who has founded a local program to help pay private school
tuition for disadvantaged children, ticked off a list of statistics
about Arkansas education to argue that the Clintons' reforms did not
work.

Indeed, the record is mixed. School course offerings have improved,
graduation and college-entrace rates have risen, and education spending
and teacher salaries have increased dramatically. But student test
scores have shown only modest improvement, scores on college-entrance
examinations have not budged, and more than half of Arkansas students
need remedial courses when they enter college.

National education experts who are acquainted with Mrs. Clinton
offer similar praise.

"She's simply one of the most knowledgeable people in the field,''
Albert Shanker, the president of the American Federation of Teachers,
said. "That can only help.''

Web Only

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.